Family Values: Divorce

[MagnetMan]

I am researching Family Values for a documentary film. I will be posting several threads that explore this subject. It would be helpful if you contribute to this research with your views on divorce. If you could preface your view with a Y or an N to signify that you have personal experience, that would be even more helpful.

 

Family values under-pin our cultural values. Over the past three generations or so, divorce has become pandemic. Tens of millions of children have been caught up in the middle of parental disputes. They have seen honored vows broken, even trashed.

 

There is no evolutionary precedent for this massive inroad into our traditional social structure. Thus we have no way of evaluating the long term effect divorce will have on the collective psyche.

 

The question is: Are we heading towards a more dynamic view of ourselves as individuals and as a culture - via the trauma divorce creates in the family home - or are we on a downhill road to gradual cultural decay?

[InfiniteNow]

Could just be that with the population increase, we have better choices available to us, so we leave a less than ideal choice/person for someone else who seems to fit our mold better.

 

Like if you live in a small town with one tiny store, of course you're going to buy the rice they sell and the one brand of canned goods. However, you move to a big city with lots of options, you'll pick the food that fits you best.

 

Same with marriage. You made a lot of assumptions in your post. Who says it has anything to do with society or culture?

[Rebiu]

If you could preface your view with a Y or an N to signify that you have personal experience, that would be even more helpful.

I have no personal experience with divorce.

Family values under-pin our cultural values. Over the past three generations or so, divorce has become pandemic. Tens of millions of children have been caught up in the middle of parental disputes. They have seen honored vows broken, even trashed.

You are assuming that divorce is the less desirable alternative. I suggest that in many cases divorce is better for the children than the continued modeling of a dysfunctional relationship held together by cultural sanction.

There is no evolutionary precedent for this massive inroad into our traditional social structure. Thus we have no way of evaluating the long term effect divorce will have on the collective psyche.

I think is has been very common historically for couple to separate even if they were not availed of the relief and closure of divorce and therefore the idea that society is radically changing is overestimated.

The question is: Are we heading towards a more dynamic view of ourselves as individuals and as a culture - via the trauma divorce creates in the family home - or are we on a downhill road to gradual cultural decay?

The force that push this culture towards a more dynamic outlook are greater freedom is increasing access to information and experience. This is facilitated by technology more than culture. If personal access to ideas is curtailed then cultural decay ensues. I do not think divorce has a significant impact because it is the result of other factors not the cause.

[Tormod]

There is no evolutionary precedent for this massive inroad into our traditional social structure. Thus we have no way of evaluating the long term effect divorce will have on the collective psyche.

 

I fail to see where evolution comes into this. Where would we look for evidence of this?

 

What sort of marriage are you talking about, and what kind of statistic are you using? Statistics for the US, Asia, Australia, Africa?

 

On the same note, what will be the long-term effect of all the unhappy marriages that must have existed prior to the massive divorce watershed you are talking about?

 

Edit: Forgot to add, I am a child of divorced parents (since the age of 3), but am happily married myself.

[Rebiu]

I forgot to mention that my parents separated when I was ten. I lived with an Aunt and several cousins for a few years and then with my mother until I was 16 and then I live with my stepsister until I got my own place on my 18th birthday. This place was a tiny duplex rented on the other side by none other than dear old mom.

 

I am happily married with 3 kids and have worked extremely hard to make this marriage work.

[MagnetMan]

If personal access to ideas is curtailed then cultural decay ensues. I do not think divorce has a significant impact because it is the result of other factors not the cause.

 

Culture is founded on sound family values. If those continue to deteriorate then ideas will gradually no longer ensue. If we do not protect the child by making adult scarifices that uphold the vows we made when we married, and make the best of it, then where does it end?

[Rebiu]

Culture is founded on sound family values. If those continue to deteriorate then ideas will gradually no longer ensue. If we do not protect the child by making adult scarifices that uphold the vows we made when we married, and make the best of it, then where does it end?

It is foolish to think family requires sacrifice. Families require that choices be made. These choices offer benefits to the individual as well as the family and therefore they are not sacrifices.

 

Please enumerate the sound family values that culture is found on. It is my opinion that there are no such thing as family values and any genuine values apply to individuals in our out of families.

[MagnetMan]

It is foolish to think family requires sacrifice. Families require that choices be made. These choices offer benefits to the individual as well as the family and therefore they are not sacrifices.

The sacrifces I am refering to ehre concern parenting. If, for instance, a mother prefers her career over rearing her children , then she should make the sacrfice and do the right thing - or run the risk of having hers and the kid's life destroyed by deliquincy.

 

Please enumerate the sound family values that culture is found on. It is my opinion that there are no such thing as family values and any genuine values apply to individuals in our out of families.

 

I have listed family values on another thread But here they are again.

Sharing and caring ethic, chore-based work ethic; courage ethic. conscientious craftsmanship ethic, creative vision ethic, intellectual ethic. All of these are innate within the human psyche from birth and need to be encouraged to express themselves in everyday behavior inside the home as the child grows to maturity, via careful parental guidance. These values support the Confucian principle of filial piety (parental veneration). When these ethics are properly evoked we have a valuable family member and a creatively productive, self-policed, citizen. If family values decline, so does the culture.

[Racoon]

If, for instance, a mother prefers her career over rearing her children , then she should make the sacrfice and do the right thing - or run the risk of having hers and the kid's life destroyed by deliquincy.

 

True enough MM, and with today's Economics, of paying the Mortgage and bills,it almost always necessitates a second income.

Mothers should well consider this and plan far ahead when thinking of kids.

Unfortunately, most just 'Kinda' happen'...

Thats why there is Child Support

 

We had a baby-sitter after school usually, and we(my sibblings and I) were left to fend for ourselves much of the time.

Fortunately we all turned out OK, but I definitely see the Conundrum here.

In Sociology, we had to budget a single mother of 3 who worked 40-50 hours a week as a cashier at a grocery store!

Not an easy task.:thumbs_up

 

Best advice: DON'T GET KNOCKED UP!

and get your Education in order first!!

 

of course people don't usually think that far ahead of their Hormones...:Waldo:

You bring up some solid ideas Magnet Man, and I like the style you bring...:pirate:

Education of Teenagers, especially women, about sex and birth control should ALWAYS be implemented in high-school! (because many times it's more important than Algebra)

 

No kids and No felonies,

Racoon

[MagnetMan]

True enough MM, and with today's Economics, of paying the Mortgage and bills,it almost always necessitates a second income.

Mothers should well consider this and plan far ahead when thinking of kids.

Unfortunately, most just 'Kinda' happen'...

Thats why there is Child Support

 

We have to deal the best we can with the cards already dealt. I apllaud all single mothers and fathers who strugg;le with this modern dysfunction. I am concerned with the long-term effect on our culture if we do not ask ourselves if we have a future problem on our hands or not. If there is a comnsensus that we do have a problem, then what shall we do about it before it gets worse? The fact that every child needs both parents for truly healthy development cannot be denied

 

As you say, education is the key. There are two marital issues that we need to recognize here. Our specie is naturally polygamous. Modern males get married far too young. Females are ready for motherhood at puberty. Males generally only reach self-mastery at 42 (too many never do) That is when he wants to pass on his learning to his own progeny and is naturally ready for husbandry and fatherhood. Divorce can be avoided if a young woman seeks out a mature male to father her children. If she opts for a younger male, she has to be prepared to deal with (mother) and tolerate the trepasses of her immature mate, as he struggles to develop self-mastery.

[Rebiu]

The sacrifces I am refering to ehre concern parenting. If, for instance, a mother prefers her career over rearing her children

Consider stay at home dads, part time work for both parents instead of full time for one, working out of the home, working while kids are at school.

, then she should make the sacrfice and do the right thing

It is a bit arrogant to call you perspective the right thing.

- or run the risk of having hers and the kid's life destroyed by deliquincy.

I suppose we all run that risk. You view of a families options seems a bit inflexible.

I have listed family values on another thread But here they are again.

Sharing and caring ethic, chore-based work ethic; courage ethic. conscientious craftsmanship ethic, creative vision ethic, intellectual ethic.

These are not family values, as they all apply to all individuals.

All of these are innate within the human psyche from birth and need to be encouraged to express themselves in everyday behavior inside the home as the child grows to maturity, via careful parental guidance.

You concepts are too vague to even have consensus let alone an agreed upon standard value. What you consider an appropriate sharing I may see as inappropriate and therefore you may interpret this disagreement as deterioration and I see it as an appropriate change.

These values support the Confucian principle of filial piety (parental veneration). When these ethics are properly evoked we have a valuable family member and a creatively productive, self-policed, citizen. If family values decline, so does the culture.

The modern American culture is far better than it has ever been in the past. The sum of changes that have occurred between any two eras has been positive.

[Rebiu]

As you say, education is the key. There are two marital issues that we need to recognize here. Our specie is naturally polygamous. Modern males get married far too young. Females are ready for motherhood at puberty. Males generally only reach self-mastery at 42 (too many never do) That is when he wants to pass on his learning to his own progeny and is naturally ready for husbandry and fatherhood. Divorce can be avoided if a young woman seeks out a mature male to father her children. If she opts for a younger male, she has to be prepared to deal with (mother) and tolerate the trepasses of her immature mate, as he struggles to develop self-mastery.

These are bold and interesting theories. I do not agree with you assumptions though.

 

My perspective on these issues is that children are taught, even forced to learn to be irresponsible, immature children. Being a father of three children I have found that children can handle a great deal of complexity. They are sincere and deserve sincerity. They will be responsible if it is expected and modeled for them. I was ready to be a father at age 21 but did not manage to put together a stable enough relationship until I was 27.

[Boerseun]

...she should make the sacrfice and do the right thing - or run the risk of having hers and the kid's life destroyed by deliquincy.

A bit sexist, don't you think? This mentality would've worked fine in the fifties, but, hey, brother man, things have changed. Daddy could equally well give up his career to care for his offspring. He also had a hand in it, after all.

[Buffy]

The number of completely unsubstantiated and subjective assumptions you've made in this thread is positively breathtaking:

• Family values under-pin our cultural values. No, religion and government do, and we have ample evidence of "group" families, especially in more primitive cultures, where parents take the lead with their own children, but the entire village fills in whenever necessary.
  
• Over the past three generations or so, divorce has become pandemic. Divorce is a modern term, and the amusing assumption here is actually that *divorce* is somehow fundamentally different than the age-old problem of people rarely living beyond the age of 30 up until the last couple hundred years. The only evidence that's usually provided is the "single parenting is bad" which seems to have been pretty common throughout human history.
  
• There is no evolutionary precedent for this massive inroad into our traditional social structure. This one is just plain false. Most animals are *not* monogamous, and all you have to do is look around at some of our own MCPs around here to see that that evolutionary trait is well ingrained. In fact the only real difference today is that extra-marital affairs happen *less often* because divorce is available. You want to argue that its healthy for kids to grow up *knowing* that dad's off bonking his best friend's wife and he and mom find a way to have no relationship because there's no alternative?
  
• Thus we have no way of evaluating the long term effect divorce will have on the collective psyche. Only if you assume that its unprecedented, which its not...
  
• If [family values] continue to deteriorate then ideas will gradually no longer ensue. Again, only if you assume that they're the *only* source of culture, which there is no evidence that they are. You might want to try to present some evidence for this argument. Indeed, you'll need to justify this statement by showing why *no other* social dynamic might replace it, like the return of societal-group support.
  
• If we do not protect the child by making adult scarifices that uphold the vows we made when we married, and make the best of it, then where does it end? Its the old slippery-slope argument, Chief. You are making a huge assumption that "vows" are the only important issue, why is that? Can you show why maintaining vows while allowing the children to suffer the more severe parental conflict as has been the case throughout cultures where divorce or separation is discouraged?
  
• These values support the Confucian principle of filial piety. Nice values, but how is filial piety hurt more when parents deal with each other honestly and rationally through separation versus the subterfuge and hidden or open hatred that is fostered without it?
  
• If, for instance, a mother prefers her career over rearing her children, then she should make the sacrfice and do the right thing - or run the risk of having hers and the kid's life destroyed by deliquincy. So many assumptions for one sentance! Preference has nothing to do with career choices. Women pursuing careers can occur within a happy marriage. Conservative women would rail at your description of their choice as "sacrifice". Single motherhood does not lead to delinquency. After being called on this point you've tried to push it into "societal dysfunction", but then you're contradicting your thesis that its individual actions that cause the problem. Unless you start to divide the world between those who "had bad things happen" versus "willful, selfish scorning of family values" in which case its definitely not a societal problem.
  
• Modern males get married far too young. Females are ready for motherhood at puberty.... And this leads to a strong argument for polygamy too, but even where there are strong societal norms to avoid this, the question becomes, do you allow them to procreate while young? Or should all men wait until their 42 to have sex with 12 year-old girls? The "perfect world" you're describing here is something that we have been evolving away from since the dawn of history, and is only seen in very primitive societies or those with very lopsided patriarchal mores. It seems though that you're trying to say that going away from what many consider extreme is the problem. Can you provide any arguments to support this?
  

Your argument is popular among some very conservative groups in our society, but it really requires an odd view of history to try to claim that the 50's style nuclear family is the *norm* or that somehow families today are far more disrupted than they have been in the past, either in the short or long view of human history. All you've done here is to drag out the dogma of certain religious sects--which in my estimation are really only twisting some relatively recent arguments, and making them "morally based" in order to log roll a susceptible group in to gaining political power.

 

You've got to try a bit harder if you're going to engage people in honest debate about issues that I *agree* are important ones to discuss. Pejoritively dismissing views that are not aligned with your specific viewpoint--which your polite exposition hardly masks--will not be conducive to rational discussion.

 

For the record: I'm a child of divorce and am divorced myself (with a non-deliquent kid!) and strongly feel that the institution of marriage is good, strong, and hardly "threatened" by "recent history." So, yes, I expect to get married again.

 

Oh the wife! Oh the kids! Oh the waitress! :confused:

Buffy

[MagnetMan]

• Family values under-pin our cultural values. No, religion and government do, and we have ample evidence of "group" families, especially in more primitive cultures, where parents take the lead with their own children, but the entire village fills in whenever necessary.

 

Religion and government are the result of family values. If we all indoctrinated our children to become atheists and a communists tomorrow, we will have an entirely different culture within 20 years.

 

With due respect, having got this base fact wrong, and by not acknowledging the fundamental effect parents have on cultivating the future behavior of society as a whole. the rest of your argument does not, in my opinion, hold any water.

[pgrmdave]

If we all indoctrinated our children to become atheists and a communists tomorrow, we will have an entirely different culture within 20 years.

 

It is interesting that you agree that the basis of the culture is the religion and government, yet you say that it's not true. If it is only family values that create our culture, then the religion and government shouldn't matter as long as the family stays the same. By saying that if you change the religion and government then the culture changes, you agree with Buffy.

[Buffy]

Religion and government are the result of family values.

You state this as a given, but the evidence appears to indicate otherwise. If anything religion and government direct "family values" almost entirely in today's society. But from an evolutionary and anthropological standpoint, the nuclear family is an extremely recent phenomenon. Both animals and early humans and early human societies show a multitude of evidence that the fundamental social grouping is the "tribe" or "hive" or "pod", and that social grouping is manifested in modern society by religion and government. Many different "family units" are represented from bee hives where the hive *is* the family, to traditional hunter-gatherer societies where child rearing and relationships are communal (often with chiefs having the privilege of non-monogomy).

 

What evidence can you show that June and Ward Cleaver with no extended family and picket fences to the world represent the fundamental defining nature of society?

having got this base fact wrong ... the rest of your argument does not, in my opinion, hold any water.

Still up to you to show that this "base fact" is or is not correct. I'm showing evidence, you're simply saying its obvious... Why is it obvious?

 

Sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids, :naughty:

Buffy